Thread: Value of: Sam Gagner and Ryan Whitney
View Single Post
Old
01-01-2013, 11:00 AM
  #112
Roof Daddy
Registered User
 
Roof Daddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmbr_24 View Post
There is something a few people are failing to realize in this thread. Many people view the Oilers having Gagner as the 2nd line center as one of the reasons why the team has been the worst team in hockey for the past few years. He isn't going to have a big value.

He isn't good enough to play in the top 6 on a contender and he isn't good enough defensively to play in the bottom 6 if that is what teams expect those players to be.

Now, maybe you are right and he would be better on the wing but not too many fans are going to want to find out if it means he is on their team.

I was under the impression that Gagner played with some of the Oilers best players last year, I am unsure about how much who his linemates were or how much ice time he gets have an effect on his stats, but on most teams he would not be playing with a guy like Eberle or get more ice time than guys like Tyler Seguin or Milan Lucic and that really leads me to believe that his numbers would go down on almost every other team in the league.

There is not much for fans of other teams to like about Gagner, 40+ points is not anything to get excited about for your 2nd line center. It wouldn't be bad if he was a defensive wizard, but he's not.

I'm not saying he is entirely useless, I am saying that he is not a desireable player from a fans perspective. You just can't expect fans to want to trade for Gagner.

Maybe my perception is off, I don't watch the Oilers as much as I would like so I will let you guys make that judgement, but to me Gagner seems like a mostly if not all offense type of guy, he just happens to be the lowest scoring guy like that in the entire league. He isn't useful for much else. Is that at all accurate?
I think we're both on the same page, I can't really disagree with anything you posted. This is why I realize his trade value isn't substantial and that our best bet is holding onto him, hoping he takes the next step we've been waiting a couple seasons for. This is where we may not see eye to eye, is whether Gagner can still develop his game. So many people want to tag him as a career 40ish pt guy with poor D because for 5 seasons this is what he has been. What people don't want to acknowledge is that this was done from age 18-22. I personally think his game can develop. At the same time, I can also understand why people look at 5 seasons as a large enough body of work to pigeonhole a player, regardless of age. But nearly every team has a prospect that is close to that age that hasn't established a full time NHL career. Colbourne in TOR, McRae in STL, Nyqvist in DET, Loktionov in LA just to name a few, are all 22-23, none have established themselves as every day NHLers. Yet all remain in the top 5 of their team's respective system based on the potential that they develop the parts of their game that hinder them from becoming everyday NHLers. Why does that same potential not apply to Gagner? We saw Giroux go from great player to superstar from age 23-24. Is it inconceivable to think Gagner could go from below average 2nd line C to above average 2nd line C if he improved his skating and defensive reads while putting up another 5-10 pts?

Roof Daddy is offline   Reply With Quote